PDA

View Full Version : In Canada, a Sports Juggernaut Missing One Thing: Winning Teams



Red CB Toronto
01-26-2012, 04:42 PM
An interesting from an out of town perspective, intersting it is mentioned that TFC has sold out 74 of 77 games at BMO

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/27/sports/hockey/canadian-sport-juggernaut-needs-winning-teams.html?_r=1

Roogsy
01-26-2012, 05:20 PM
An interesting from an out of town perspective, intersting it is mentioned that TFC has sold out 74 of 77 games at BMO

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/27/sports/hockey/canadian-sport-juggernaut-needs-winning-teams.html?_r=1



“But it’s also the fans’ fault for continuing to support the team.”

Therein lies the crux.

As I mentioned in my post in today's news, Toronto fans deserve what we have.

Eastend
01-26-2012, 05:26 PM
It's a catch 22. No support = no team.

Roogsy
01-26-2012, 05:33 PM
I don't believe that to be the case. There is an expectation of greatness by the fans of some clubs. Can you imagine the New York Yankees going through a drought like Toronto fans have gone through? The fans would never accept that and management knows it. Much like here management knows there is nothing to be afraid of.

The problem with Toronto fans of all sports, is that we have equated "support" with unconditional cheerleading.

Waggy
01-26-2012, 05:58 PM
I don't believe that to be the case. There is an expectation of greatness by the fans of some clubs. Can you imagine the New York Yankees going through a drought like Toronto fans have gone through? The fans would never accept that and management knows it. Much like here management knows there is nothing to be afraid of.

The problem with Toronto fans of all sports, is that we have equated "support" with unconditional cheerleading.

The Yankees had a 25ish year title drought from the early 70s to the late 90s didn't they? What about Boston with all its teams? Until recently, the Red Sox hadn't won in 90 years, the Bruins hadn't won in almost 50, the Pats had never won and the Celtics hadn't won in 20 years. Has fans being upset/protesting/not going to games brought titles to the Mariners (or A's, or Twins, or Indians, or Jays, or O's etc)? How about the Grizzlies (or clippers, or hawks, or hornets, or bobcats etc)? Or the Bills (or Jacksonville, or Cinci, or Cleveland, or Arizona etc)?

I think you rate fans involvement in teams as relates to winning too strongly Roogs. Fans cant force an owner to sell, and cant force an owner to sell to a fan friendly owner if they do. I can't see how poor attendence and lower revenues would make a more fan friendly owner more likely than good attendance and higher revenue.


Edit: and there's a long list of well supported teams who struggle to win titles as well. Especially in soccer (I'll ignore those)

Bruins (until last year)
Blackhawks (until 3 years ago)
Flyers
Mets
Dodgers
Seahawks
Saints (until last year)
Canucks
Knicks
Rangers
Sabres
SF Giants (until 2 years ago)
Jets
Raiders (outside of the early 2000's title, it's been a long 20ish years)
Cubs
Brewers
Reds

etc etc.

ensco
01-26-2012, 10:38 PM
Corporate ownership underperforms on the field.

The teams owned by these conglomerates (in Philly, NY, Denver, Atlanta, LA, Toronto) have done worse than the average. The math has been done in other threads on this site.

Our conglomerate has underperformed all other conglomerates.

The Clippers have played in more playoff games than all Toronto sports teams combined over the last 7 years.

Fort York Redcoat
01-26-2012, 10:54 PM
The problem with Toronto fans of all sports, is that we have equated "support" with unconditional cheerleading.


"Cheerleading?" How many Toronto sports fans do you know that aren't complaining about their team's poor performance with fellow fans?

Most cases it's just an influx of new fans that can finally attend live when others give up.

ManUtd4ever
01-26-2012, 11:15 PM
I don't believe that to be the case. There is an expectation of greatness by the fans of some clubs. Can you imagine the New York Yankees going through a drought like Toronto fans have gone through? The fans would never accept that and management knows it. Much like here management knows there is nothing to be afraid of.

The problem with Toronto fans of all sports, is that we have equated "support" with unconditional cheerleading.

The declining attendance figures in recent years for TFC, the Jays, Raptors, and Argos would clearly indicate otherwise.

The Leafs are really the only Toronto franchise that doesn't risk losing support as a result of an extended period of futility, and Leaf fans do not represent all sports fans in our city.

glaze
01-26-2012, 11:23 PM
You need a dedicated ownership group, but you also need competant management.
I dont see what's stopping TFC from competing for MLS titles. It isn't like the two glamour franchises are trading the trophy each year.
As for the Jays, Leafs and Raptors, the problems are unique to each of them. I'd share, but not sure if everyone wants to hear those opinions on a soccer thread. And the CFL, thats perhaps the most fixed league of them all.

Waggy
01-26-2012, 11:37 PM
Corporate ownership underperforms on the field.

The teams owned by these conglomerates (in Philly, NY, Denver, Atlanta, LA, Toronto) have done worse than the average. The math has been done in other threads on this site.

Our conglomerate has underperformed all other conglomerates.

The Clippers have played in more playoff games than all Toronto sports teams combined over the last 7 years.

Hey if it wasn't for Dunleavy putting Daniel Ewing on the floor to take a potential game winning shot against the Suns that year the Clips could have potentially won a title. But ya, totally agree with you. And unfortunately north american sports are always going to be dominated by corporate ownership. There aren't a lot of individuals who can afford a pro sports team in the 21st century. They're just worth too much.

edit: I say that, but at the time I was SO so so happy to see Daniel Ewing take and miss that 3. Too bad David Stern and Stew Jackson screwed the Suns. That turned out to be their best shot. Poor Nash

ag futbol
01-27-2012, 12:02 AM
"Cheerleading?" How many Toronto sports fans do you know that aren't complaining about their team's poor performance with fellow fans?

Most cases it's just an influx of new fans that can finally attend live when others give up.
I don't know if I'd call it cheerleading, but quite a few come off as diluted. Maybe you're right though, it could just be the new warm bodies that just came in the door.

Every time someone tells me that a swing man with above average athleticism, inconsistent jump shot, and average handles is going to be a star I can't help but giggle a little. Hey, it's not like there are 5 of those in the draft every year....

Roogsy
01-27-2012, 12:27 AM
The declining attendance figures in recent years for TFC, the Jays, Raptors, and Argos would clearly indicate otherwise.

The Leafs are really the only Toronto franchise that doesn't risk losing support as a result of an extended period of futility, and Leaf fans do not represent all sports fans in our city.

The demand on Leaf tickets does take a hit during tough times, but obvious not enough to worry ownership. They still either nearly or completely fill the arena. What usually happens is scalpers take a hit. Last year, I could get tickets at face but the arena was still full. This year it's much more difficult to get tickets. Success does increase demand and failure does reduce it to an extent, but the difference between Toronto and others cities is that ownership in other cities feel the wrath of fans much more acutely than in Toronto. Declining attendance has to be more extreme, TV viewership has to drop off significantly and merchandising has to take a hit. That trifecta is like a bucket of cold water. And it doesnt happen in Toronto, not to the degree necessary especially with the Leafs but to a lesser extent the other clubs as well. So unfortunately, the declining attendance does not exactly disprove the accusation of cheerleading for these clubs.

The Argos is a bit of a different story. They have not had horrendously long streaks of ineptitude. They do make playoffs, they do win championships. The struggles of the Argos has more to do with the interest level overall in the CFL from within Toronto.

Shakes McQueen
01-27-2012, 12:30 AM
If you only support the team when it's good, you're fairweather fans. If you support the team when they are bad, you're enablers. Seems like a lose-lose proposition to me.

- Scott

Roogsy
01-27-2012, 12:30 AM
"Cheerleading?" How many Toronto sports fans do you know that aren't complaining about their team's poor performance with fellow fans?

This actually proves my point. If you think "complaining" has any sort of impact, then that is part of the problem. Toronto fans can complain all they want but if they buy tickets and buy jerseys and watch the TV broadcasts, then ownership is happy as a pig in shit.

Roogsy
01-27-2012, 12:38 AM
The Yankees had a 25ish year title drought from the early 70s to the late 90s didn't they? What about Boston with all its teams? Until recently, the Red Sox hadn't won in 90 years, the Bruins hadn't won in almost 50, the Pats had never won and the Celtics hadn't won in 20 years. Has fans being upset/protesting/not going to games brought titles to the Mariners (or A's, or Twins, or Indians, or Jays, or O's etc)? How about the Grizzlies (or clippers, or hawks, or hornets, or bobcats etc)? Or the Bills (or Jacksonville, or Cinci, or Cleveland, or Arizona etc)?

I think you rate fans involvement in teams as relates to winning too strongly Roogs. Fans cant force an owner to sell, and cant force an owner to sell to a fan friendly owner if they do. I can't see how poor attendence and lower revenues would make a more fan friendly owner more likely than good attendance and higher revenue.


Edit: and there's a long list of well supported teams who struggle to win titles as well. Especially in soccer (I'll ignore those)

Bruins (until last year)
Blackhawks (until 3 years ago)
Flyers
Mets
Dodgers
Seahawks
Saints (until last year)
Canucks
Knicks
Rangers
Sabres
SF Giants (until 2 years ago)
Jets
Raiders (outside of the early 2000's title, it's been a long 20ish years)
Cubs
Brewers
Reds

etc etc.

This is an apples to oranges comparison. The kind of money and support a team in Toronto receives (like the Leafs) cannot possibly be compared to the Sabres! Or the Brewers! The fact that Toronto fans would equate themselves to teams of this size and impact is exactly the problem. The money and influence we have is at the same level of the Yankees of this world (in hockey I mean, the Jays cant spend at the Yankee level) and yet we're happy comparing ourselves to small market teams?

As for the Yankees, their longest streak without a championship was 18 years and their longest streak without a championship series appearance was 15 years. This was during the difficult 80s where they just seemed unlucky because these facts are misleading. The Yankees, despite not winning a championship during this period were still the winningest team in the league in this same period of time. That they may have been snakebitten happens in sports. As does the fact that it eventually ends because the Yankees eventally found their way back to winning trophies. But they never stopped winning. And that continuous drive to win is what helped them out of their funk. What excellence is going to help our teams? Its not like we are snakebitten and despite having a great record, we cant win championships. We dont have anything close to a "great record"! For any of our teams! And we expect all of a sudden to someday find ourselves in the middle of a run of excellence? That's dreaming.

It's that complacency that is directly tied to our results. Leaf fans pre-expansion would never have accepted that. Montreal fans certainly dont, which is why they have always been closer to getting back to the Stanley Cup than we ever have in the past 20 years.

Until Toronto fans do more than simply shrug our shoulders, our teams will continue to suck. Yes every once in a while one of our teams may make a run (Raptors anyone?) and maybe show up in the playoffs and fluke through a round. But will that be the norm or the exception? I am guessing the exception.

Roogsy
01-27-2012, 12:46 AM
If you only support the team when it's good, you're fairweather fans. If you support the team when they are bad, you're enablers. Seems like a lose-lose proposition to me.

- Scott

That is a false dichotomy Scott. An oversimplification. You can support a team without being a cheerleader.

Shakes McQueen
01-27-2012, 01:15 AM
That is a false dichotomy Scott. An oversimplification. You can support a team without being a cheerleader.


This actually proves my point. If you think "complaining" has any sort of impact, then that is part of the problem. Toronto fans can complain all they want but if they buy tickets and buy jerseys and watch the TV broadcasts, then ownership is happy as a pig in shit.

If you're not even watching the games on television, in what sense are you a fan of your team any more?

As for your analogy re: the Montreal Canadiens, the closest the Canadiens have gotten in the last 20 years is the conference final. The Leafs also had playoff appearances, one resulting in going to the conference finals, in the last 20 years. It's the post-lockout years that have been pretty dire for the most part.

Things have been truly dire for a bit over half a decade, but some people see things looking up for at least a few of our pro franchises. I know you disagree with this assessment, but that doesn't make those people drones (can't think of a better word - I know you didn't use it).

Personally, I think the Jays, Leafs, and TFC are on reasonably good, well managed paths right now. The Raps are looking grim, but then again, the building is half-empty most nights this season as a result.

- Scott

Roogsy
01-27-2012, 01:47 AM
If you're not even watching the games on television, in what sense are you a fan of your team any more?

As for your analogy re: the Montreal Canadiens, the closest the Canadiens have gotten in the last 20 years is the conference final. The Leafs also had playoff appearances, one resulting in going to the conference finals, in the last 20 years. It's the post-lockout years that have been pretty dire for the most part.

Things have been truly dire for a bit over half a decade, but some people see things looking up for at least a few of our pro franchises. I know you disagree with this assessment, but that doesn't make those people drones (can't think of a better word - I know you didn't use it).

Personally, I think the Jays, Leafs, and TFC are on reasonably good, well managed paths right now. The Raps are looking grim, but then again, the building is half-empty most nights this season as a result.

- Scott

Since "reasonably good" is a subjective opinion, I cant evalute it but certainly cant agree with it. How any team that doesnt make the playoffs, and in the case of TFC doesnt even come close, be considered any measure of "good" is beyond me. And that would be a minimal qualification.

By the way, the Habs won in 93 meaning in the last 20 years they have a championship. And they have made the playoffs 4 out of the last 5 seasons including a division championship, the Leafs havent made it to the playoffs once. If you think this record is comparable, once again, I disagree.

As for things looking up, to afford these organizations any kind of faith before they produce results is to willingly allow yourself to be fooled again. After being burned several times, a sensible person becomes skeptical. I refer you to Einstein's theory of insanity.

Shakes McQueen
01-27-2012, 01:50 AM
Since "reasonably good" is a subjective opinion, I cant evalute it but certainly cant agree with it. How any team that doesnt make the playoffs, and in the case of TFC doesnt even come close, be considered any measure of "good" is beyond me. And that would be a minimal qualification.

I didn't say they were good teams (or at least, they haven't proven it yet) - I said they were on good paths. Meaning, they are doing a good job of building and managing for potential success to come.

- Scott

Waggy
01-27-2012, 01:51 AM
This is an apples to oranges comparison. The kind of money and support a team in Toronto receives (like the Leafs) cannot possibly be compared to the Sabres! Or the Brewers! The fact that Toronto fans would equate themselves to teams of this size and impact is exactly the problem. The money and influence we have is at the same level of the Yankees of this world (in hockey I mean, the Jays cant spend at the Yankee level) and yet we're happy comparing ourselves to small market teams?

As for the Yankees, their longest streak without a championship was 18 years and their longest streak without a championship series appearance was 15 years. This was during the difficult 80s where they just seemed unlucky because these facts are misleading. The Yankees, despite not winning a championship during this period were still the winningest team in the league in this same period of time. That they may have been snakebitten happens in sports. As does the fact that it eventually ends because the Yankees eventally found their way back to winning trophies. But they never stopped winning. And that continuous drive to win is what helped them out of their funk. What excellence is going to help our teams? Its not like we are snakebitten and despite having a great record, we cant win championships. We dont have anything close to a "great record"! For any of our teams! And we expect all of a sudden to someday find ourselves in the middle of a run of excellence? That's dreaming.

It's that complacency that is directly tied to our results. Leaf fans pre-expansion would never have accepted that. Montreal fans certainly dont, which is why they have always been closer to getting back to the Stanley Cup than we ever have in the past 20 years.

Until Toronto fans do more than simply shrug our shoulders, our teams will continue to suck. Yes every once in a while one of our teams may make a run (Raptors anyone?) and maybe show up in the playoffs and fluke through a round. But will that be the norm or the exception? I am guessing the exception.

Wasn't comparing TFC to those teams, just naming teams who have fan support and don't win. As much as you don't like to believe it, TFC and MLS are closer compared to the north american sports than any soccer team or league. And I actually think the Mets are a very good comparison for the Leafs (and TFC). My point basically is that fan demands can't change ownership. And if ownership does change fans can't influence who it changes to. And fan boycotts or protests aren't going to make a corporation decide "you know what? we're getting out. and forget the highest bidder, we're going to sell to some guy from Toronto who dreams of bringing title after title here". There is 0 correlation to fan actions and winning. There is a correlation between winning and getting fans. But fans don't pick GM's, fans dont pick owners, fans don't influence what other teams do or where free agents go (free agents slightly. though protesting/angry fans probably influence in a negative way).

What do you think would happen if leafs fans en mass stopped buying tickets? The front office would slap their foreheads and go "Oh shit, now we HAVE to win a stanley cup!"? They'd just start panicking and acting like Mo, changing coaches, making crazy trades etc trying to find a winning combination. Stability brings championships. Fan expectations just make a nice story to go along with that. Lots of teams fanbases expect championships. Only 1 in every league gets one. It's a false positive to say "See! They won because the fans demanded it!" Well the team that lost the championships fans probably demanded it too, and the ones in the semi finals, and probably a few who weren't even close.

The Lakers don't win titles because their fan base won't stand for failure, the Lakers win titles because most basketball players want to play there and because of that they have their pick of almost every talented player. Same with United. Same with the Yankees. The Mets are in the same market as the yankees, how come baseball players don't want to play there the same way? Because the franchise is associated with failure and dissaray. Adding mass fan discontent isn't going to help, changing the culture of the front office/organization will. And once they win once, the cache comes and then there's a chance of becoming a yankees or a lakers.

Shakes McQueen
01-27-2012, 01:56 AM
By the way, the Habs won in 93 meaning in the last 20 years they have a championship. And they have made the playoffs 4 out of the last 5 seasons, the Leafs havent made 1. If you think this record is comparable, once again, I disagree.

You're specifically cherry picking the post-lockout years, after previously citing a 20 year sample size, and acting as though that was my argument ("If you think this comparable..."). I already specifically acknowledged things have been mostly dire since the lockout.

Fair enough on your first point - the Canadiens won a Stanley Cup nearly but not quite 20 years ago. Doesn't really fundamentally change my argument. The Jays technically won two World Series titles in the last 20 years, but I suspect that (rightfully) doesn't affect your argument much, about the state of Toronto sports.

- Scott

Shakes McQueen
01-27-2012, 02:07 AM
Anyway, I've said all I have to say about this topic. We've been on this merry-go-round many times, and articles writing about the apparently sorry state of Toronto sports are kind of tedious to me.

I watch all of the teams I claim to be a fan of, but if they are crap for several years I won't pay to see them live or buy their overpriced licensed merchandise. For me, that's a fair compromise between my loyalties as a fan, and my imperative to send a message to the owners.

- Scott

Roogsy
01-27-2012, 02:09 AM
You're specifically cherry picking the post-lockout years, after previously citing a 20 year sample size, and acting as though that was my argument ("If you think this comparable..."). I already specifically acknowledged things have been mostly dire since the lockout.

Fair enough on your first point - the Canadiens won a Stanley Cup nearly but not quite 20 years ago. Doesn't really fundamentally change my argument. The Jays technically won two World Series titles in the last 20 years, but I suspect that (rightfully) doesn't affect your argument much, about the state of Toronto sports.

- Scott

Actually it does. In my opinion, the last of the Blue Jay World Series wins also marked the end of a particular era for that organization in that not only did they stop winning, but they took a different direction after most of the architects of those winnings teams left. The Jays enjoyed a brief period of "glory days" between 85 and 94 that saw it's capacity for contention severely drop off thereafter. Instead of building on those historic wins, its almost like they went back to the drawing board. NY on the other hand has shown an ability to sustain their excellence. The Jays pulled their own "TFC" by hiring Ash as GM instead of a proven winner and subsequently grinded their way down to mediocrity whereas for the previous decade before they were among the cream of MLB.

As for cherrypicking stats. What sample size for sports success in Toronto would change things? 10 years? 30 years? 40 years? We'd have to go back 40+ years before we can see a different culture in this city, and I am not talking about championships alone but teams we can say regardless if they actually won the ultimate prize, would regularly be in contention. That is far too long for a city that supports its teams the way we do.

Roogsy
01-27-2012, 02:17 AM
Wasn't comparing TFC to those teams, just naming teams who have fan support and don't win. As much as you don't like to believe it, TFC and MLS are closer compared to the north american sports than any soccer team or league. And I actually think the Mets are a very good comparison for the Leafs (and TFC). My point basically is that fan demands can't change ownership. And if ownership does change fans can't influence who it changes to. And fan boycotts or protests aren't going to make a corporation decide "you know what? we're getting out. and forget the highest bidder, we're going to sell to some guy from Toronto who dreams of bringing title after title here". There is 0 correlation to fan actions and winning. There is a correlation between winning and getting fans. But fans don't pick GM's, fans dont pick owners, fans don't influence what other teams do or where free agents go (free agents slightly. though protesting/angry fans probably influence in a negative way).

What do you think would happen if leafs fans en mass stopped buying tickets? The front office would slap their foreheads and go "Oh shit, now we HAVE to win a stanley cup!"? They'd just start panicking and acting like Mo, changing coaches, making crazy trades etc trying to find a winning combination. Stability brings championships. Fan expectations just make a nice story to go along with that. Lots of teams fanbases expect championships. Only 1 in every league gets one. It's a false positive to say "See! They won because the fans demanded it!" Well the team that lost the championships fans probably demanded it too, and the ones in the semi finals, and probably a few who weren't even close.

The Lakers don't win titles because their fan base won't stand for failure, the Lakers win titles because most basketball players want to play there and because of that they have their pick of almost every talented player. Same with United. Same with the Yankees. The Mets are in the same market as the yankees, how come baseball players don't want to play there the same way? Because the franchise is associated with failure and dissaray. Adding mass fan discontent isn't going to help, changing the culture of the front office/organization will. And once they win once, the cache comes and then there's a chance of becoming a yankees or a lakers.


I typed out an entire response and then the forum lost it. I wont go through the trouble of reposting it other than to say I disagree. To me, this is a "washing your hands" kind of attitude. A defeatist attitude that because we are not the owners, we dont influence how the owners and managers perform. I could not disagree with this position more.

As for the LA or NY excuse, we'd have to wonder why other teams even bother trying. I guess a basketball team in San Antonio can't win multiple NBA championships. Or a football team in remote Green Bay Wisconsin winning the Superbowl more than once, if that. Team ownership and management dont have to bother responding to these types of articles do they? We write their excuses for them.

Forgive me but I dont have an inferiority complex when it comes to Toronto. I love this city. I think its one of the greatest cities in the world and we deserve championship calibre sports teams. I know many players that come to the same conclusion when they come here. But when our own citizens view us as a second rate city, it's not hard to see where the complacency comes from.

Shakes McQueen
01-27-2012, 02:17 AM
Actually it does. In my opinion, the last of the Blue Jay World Series wins also marked the end of a particular era for that organization in that not only did they stop winning, but they took a different direction after most of the architects of those winnings teams left. The Jays enjoyed a brief period of "glory days" between 85 and 94 that saw it's capacity for contention severely drop off thereafter. Instead of building on those historic wins, its almost like they went back to the drawing board. NY on the other hand has shown an ability to sustain their excellence. The Jays pulled their own "TFC" by hiring Ash as GM instead of a proven winner and subsequently grinded their way down to mediocrity whereas for the previous decade before they were among the cream of MLB.

As for cherrypicking stats. What sample size for sports success in Toronto would change things? 10 years? 30 years? 40 years? We'd have to go back 40+ years before we can see a different culture in this city, and I am not talking about championships alone but teams we can say regardless if they actually won the ultimate prize, would regularly be in contention. That is far too long for a city that supports its teams the way we do.

Ten years ago the Leafs were a solid playoff team. Even if you think the Jays WS titles were the end of an "era" - again, that was less than 20 years ago. Toronto FC didn't exist.

Egh, I'm contradicting what I just said. Peace out. :D

- Scott

Roogsy
01-27-2012, 02:26 AM
Yet you miss the main point Scott. This isnt about one-off appearances in the playoffs, or in the case of the Canadians, a single championship win within those 20 years.

This is about creating a culture of excellence. About sustained success. Regardless if you're in the championship game every year, your team is discussed among the elite, a contender every year whether you reach that goal or not.

Can we say that about the Leafs? The Jays? The Raptors? (I wont even bring up TFC, considered a laughing stock in MLS). Not in the last decade that's for sure. And going back 20 years, while they were not bad teams, none of them were really considered contenders (except for the Jays of course who subsequently crashed). Meanwhile, other clubs, as already mentioned, were indeed maintaining some level of excellence. It was no surprise if they made it in the playoffs. It's almost an expectation. This year, we are holding our breaths to see if the Leafs have the endurance to battle for that FINAL playoff spot. It's just not the same thing.

I think what you guys are not understanding is the difference between a sports team that is respected and feared even if it's not successful every year and a club that if they do overreach it is considered a surprise, a Cinderella story. That should be absolutely unacceptable for Toronto sports fans. Our teams should be among the elite. We should not be thankful for scraps.

Roogsy
01-27-2012, 02:34 AM
Anyways, all I am telling you guys is that because of our complacency, we will never be rewarded with a perennial contender. A Detroit Red Wings if you will. A Yankees. A Lakers. A Bulls. A Patriots. We have all the pieces that are necessary for a team like that to exist here, except one of the most important things, the willpower. Maybe the Leafs make it into the playoffs this year, but will just as likely miss them next year. The same for TFC. The same for the Jays.

I doubt we will ever see any sort of dynasty here in Toronto. The best days are behind us. The pre-expansion Leafs, the early 90s Jays. That is as good as it got for us and it's sad to realize that it is likely we will never achieve that level of success again. For a guy like me, born after the 67 Leafs, the Jays are the only championship team I have ever been able to enjoy. I was hoping the same for TFC, but as you are all well aware now, this team has been a bitter disappointment for me. This team isn't winning squat except for battling it out for the Canadian championships and even then, I think our days of dominance are over, as short as they were.

Good night.

Red CB Toronto
01-27-2012, 06:35 AM
The demand on Leaf tickets does take a hit during tough times, but obvious not enough to worry ownership. They still either nearly or completely fill the arena. What usually happens is scalpers take a hit. Last year, I could get tickets at face but the arena was still full. This year it's much more difficult to get tickets. Success does increase demand and failure does reduce it to an extent, but the difference between Toronto and others cities is that ownership in other cities feel the wrath of fans much more acutely than in Toronto. Declining attendance has to be more extreme, TV viewership has to drop off significantly and merchandising has to take a hit. That trifecta is like a bucket of cold water. And it doesnt happen in Toronto, not to the degree necessary especially with the Leafs but to a lesser extent the other clubs as well. So unfortunately, the declining attendance does not exactly disprove the accusation of cheerleading for these clubs.

The Argos is a bit of a different story. They have not had horrendously long streaks of ineptitude. They do make playoffs, they do win championships. The struggles of the Argos has more to do with the interest level overall in the CFL from within Toronto.

When you look at the Argonauts I find their season by season average attendence quite interesting as you can not always consider a winning or losing season the reason for a boost or decline.

In 2003 the Argos averaged 15,083 per game only to see a jump of over 15,000 two years later coming off their first championship in eight years. In 2005 they averaged 30,196.

On the other hand when what I consider to be one of the greatest teams the CFL has ever seen when they won back to back championships in 1996 and 1997 attendence was not great. In 1996 they did 20,432 only to see it drop by 2,000 the next season 18,226.

TOBOR !
01-27-2012, 08:45 AM
I don't get how the fans get to demand a winning team to support. How in Montreal, if the team begins to perform poorly, ticket sales drop.


A sports team represents your community. You are part of that community so you go and cheer for your team. Whether or not they are successful on the field of play is of no consequence.


How many soccer teams would there be at any level globally if everyone adopted the attitude that their team must be the best, or at least have the chance to compete for that title ?


This whole 'blame the fans for going if their team continues to suck' argument is pure garbage. The fans go to support their team, regardless of results. Unlucky for some that ownership prefers to make money from their enterprise than win championships. Sports isn't supposed to be about making money. Sports is supposed to be about competing. It's supposed to be about battling for victory on the field of play.

This was more true through the most part of the last century and much less so now. In the UK we're seeing teams close up shop after 125 years of existence. Times have changed. I think sense of community has changed. People don't give a shit about their non-league local side any more when they can switch on the telly and watch their favourite EPL club play.

I dunno, maybe Toronto fans are more about turning up to see their side play regardless of expectation, whereas Montreallers demand to be the best... maybe that partially explains why the Expos left, and why once they lost the Alouettes, and how they almost lost Les Canadiens.

Maybe we should keep that in mind.

TFCBarrie
01-27-2012, 09:03 AM
I don't get how the fans get to demand a winning team to support. How in Montreal, if the team begins to perform poorly, ticket sales drop.


A sports team represents your community. You are part of that community so you go and cheer for your team. Whether or not they are successful on the field of play is of no consequence.


How many soccer teams would there be at any level globally if everyone adopted the attitude that their team must be the best, or at least have the chance to compete for that title ?


This whole 'blame the fans for going if their team continues to suck' argument is pure garbage. The fans go to support their team, regardless of results. Unlucky for some that ownership prefers to make money from their enterprise than win championships. Sports isn't supposed to be about making money. Sports is supposed to be about competing. It's supposed to be about battling for victory on the field of play.

This was more true through the most part of the last century and much less so now. In the UK we're seeing teams close up shop after 125 years of existence. Times have changed. I think sense of community has changed. People don't give a shit about their non-league local side any more when they can switch on the telly and watch their favourite EPL club play.

I dunno, maybe Toronto fans are more about turning up to see their side play regardless of expectation, whereas Montreallers demand to be the best... maybe that partially explains why the Expos left, and why once they lost the Alouettes, and how they almost lost Les Canadiens.

Maybe we should keep that in mind.


Well said, Tobor. I honestly don't care if any of the teams I support win anything, I enjoy the sport, watching the sport and watching my team play. I choose to pay money for tickets and kits because I want to, I enjoy it. I don't see value in demanding expectations of any kind from any of the teams that I follow.

Roogsy
01-27-2012, 09:04 AM
^ And that is what MLSE and most corporate team owners are counting on.

It's a recipe for mediocrity. Like I've said, we deserve these poor teams.

TFCBarrie
01-27-2012, 09:15 AM
^ And that is what MLSE and most corporate team owners are counting on.

It's a recipe for mediocrity. Like I've said, we deserve these poor teams.


I have absolutely no interest or care about what Management and Owners think or want. I do what I want and I want to spend money on the team because I enjoy it. They do not factor in my thought process.

Roogsy
01-27-2012, 09:27 AM
And that is perfectly alright. It is indeed your choice. Not just in sports but in whatever you do. Nobody should tell you how to live your life. But that's not to say that the realities of your actions should be ignored or denied. The fact of the matter is that this attitude is what leads to teams that can't make it into the playoffs for years at a time and teams that can't win championships for 40+ years. But if that's not what interests you, so be it. It is what interests me.

Greatest Ripoff
01-27-2012, 09:33 AM
I rather support a team through thick and then be a band wagon jumper. Supporting a team only when it wins is disgusting and being told you deserve mediocrity for being loyal is bull. There are thousand of teams all over the world who get poor support and it doesn't lead to anything other than even worse on the field product.

Red CB Toronto
01-27-2012, 09:37 AM
And that is perfectly alright. It is indeed your choice. Not just in sports but in whatever you do. Nobody should tell you how to live your life. But that's not to say that the realities of your actions should be ignored or denied. The fact of the matter is that this attitude is what leads to teams that can't make it into the playoffs for years at a time and teams that can't win championships for 40+ years. But if that's not what interests you, so be it. It is what interests me.

But in your opinion Roogys , what do the Argos attendence say to you, they had a jump of 15,000 in their average in a two year period. When you look at it in terms of winning, jumps or declines are not always in line with successful seasons.

Roogsy
01-27-2012, 09:39 AM
As I mentioned before, I consider the Argos to be a different animal altogether. The league has difficulty attracting major league attention in this city. While they have a dedicate fanbase, reaching beyond that fanbase has proven difficult in Toronto. The other sports however, do not have the limits of the CFL.

Roogsy
01-27-2012, 09:41 AM
I rather support a team through thick and then be a band wagon jumper. Supporting a team only when it wins is disgusting and being told you deserve mediocrity for being loyal is bull. There are thousand of teams all over the world who get poor support and it doesn't lead to anything other than even worse on the field product.

This is where the discussion gets mischaracterized. As opposed to understanding that we are talking about fan activism, it gets labelled bandwagon jumping and disloyalty. Nobody is arguing in favour of "poor" support. But rather, a different more purposeful support other than mindless cheering.

But it's an uphill battle. Most Toronto fans don't know how to do that. They don't even understand the difference.

Red CB Toronto
01-27-2012, 09:46 AM
As I mentioned before, I consider the Argos to be a different animal altogether. The league has difficulty attracting major league attention in this city. While they have a dedicate fanbase, reaching beyond that fanbase has proven difficult in Toronto. The other sports however, do not have the limits of the CFL.

My question then is who has a higher profile beyond the stadium, the Argos or TFC. What does it say to you that over a two year period the Argos average attendence went up by 15,000.

Roogsy
01-27-2012, 09:56 AM
My question then is who has a higher profile beyond the stadium, the Argos or TFC. What does it say to you that over a two year period the Argos average attendence went up by 15,000.

I happen to know the CFO of the Argos and I can tell you that attendance has many factors that influence it. It's a machine with many moving parts. Sometimes the issue influencing attendance is marketing dollars. That varies from year to year. Some years it has to do with ownership difficulties, such as the most recent change. Some years it has to do with corporate support which swings widely. Sometimes it is issues that are beyond their control, such as a resurgent team in the Jays or Leafs that draw attention away. I don't believe any other team in this city has wider swings (on a relative basis) than the Argos. Which is why the issue of support and demands of excellence, while still influential, merely get lost in the multitude of issues that surrounds that club.

The other teams don't have similar difficulties. Leaf fans don't get distracted if Jays or Argos start doing better for example. They don't experience massive ownership issues every few years. Their marketing budgets don't swing widely from year to year. Their overall situation is much more stable from an operational point of view than the Argos (believe me, every year I walk into the Argos, there is massive internal turnover) and I believe that is reflected in their respective attendance figures.

ensco
01-27-2012, 09:56 AM
Roogsy is certainly right in part - Toronto fans won't stop going or turn off the set like fans in other markets will. Yankees or Red Sox ratings go down a lot iif the teams aren't in it - it's why those teams reload every year, but we don't have to, to the same extent.

If we did have to win to be financially successful, MLSE wouldn't have accepted the salary cap, same way the Yankees and Red Sox have fought it in baseball.

Not to be overlooked - there are also a couple of ways in which we lose because we're located in a foreign country.

The Leafs lose because hockey is so white hot here, but isn't elsewhere - a guy and his wife can have a normal-ish life in most US markets - so premium players don't want to play here (Vancouver is sort of an exception because the city has unique attributes and climate).

The Raps lose because, who the hell wants to disappear up here, and our sportscenter often shows curling highlights rather than NBA highlights. The Raps need to concentrate on Europeans, and can't let the fact that Hedo was a headcase influence their strategy

MLSE's job is to figure out how to position against these realities. They haven't done a good job of it historically, and it shows. To be fair, the Raps picking Jonas V, and the Leafs loading up on Americans, are both interesting tacks, and shows that they're at last trying to deal with it.

Roogsy
01-27-2012, 09:59 AM
On that Raptor note, the unfortunate thing is that I know people who work in the NCAA and NBA and one of the issues they have pointed out is that there is no "marketing" infrastructure for the players when they come to Toronto whereas there is in almost every other city in the NBA. It may not be something the regular fan pays attention to, but it is an influencing factor in player decision-making. However, MLSE has either not identified this (meaning their ignorant to their own shortcomings) or do know this but choose not to do something about it. (I don't know which is worse.)

I have a friend in sports marketing and after watching the Bargnani Primo pasta commercial was absolutely dismayed.

Beach_Red
01-27-2012, 10:00 AM
Corporate ownership underperforms on the field.

The teams owned by these conglomerates (in Philly, NY, Denver, Atlanta, LA, Toronto) have done worse than the average. The math has been done in other threads on this site.

Our conglomerate has underperformed all other conglomerates.

.

Sure, and this goes beyond sports. Business in Canada has (no matter what Peter C. Newman says) been protected and coddled. It hasn't been a very good environment to develop highly competitve conglomerates.

Now Rogers and Bell - at the first signs of needing to compete instead of being monopoly players - get together to own the sports teams.

Still, like others have said, this is my city and my teams and so what if they never win championships? As long as they're loveable losers and not arrogant jerks like the conglomerates who own them.....

Roogsy
01-27-2012, 10:00 AM
Roogsy is certainly right in part - Toronto fans won't stop going or turn off the set like fans in other markets will. Yankees or Red Sox ratings go down a lot iif the teams aren't in it - it's why those teams reload every year, but we don't have to, to the same extent.

Bingo.

Beach_Red
01-27-2012, 10:10 AM
Bingo.

No. Sure, they would WANT to do something to be more competitve, but what makes you think they can? What makes you think this isn't the best they can do?

Look at any other industry - cell phones, the TV/movie business, the auto industry, anything - what you see is a history of Canadian companies looking for ways to be protected from outside competition (even industries that have to be in Canada like resources needed rules to protect Canadian comanies) rather than working to be the best. It's just not our tradition, it's not what we do, it's not in our blood at the management level. And Canadians seem satisfied iall these other industries to spend more and get less than in most other industrialized countries, why should it be any different with sports?

Roogsy
01-27-2012, 10:11 AM
Still, like others have said, this is my city and my teams and so what if they never win championships? As long as they're loveable losers and not arrogant jerks like the conglomerates who own them.....

This may be an extreme example, but how long do you think this country would accept our hockey team failing to make it out of a round robin? 1 year? 2 years? 5 years?

We have such high standards for our national hockey team. Being contenders is not only wanted, but expected. I can't reconcile your statement here about "what if they never win championships" with other sports teams, that have the capacity and support to dominate just as much, with the expectations of our national hockey program. It would seem at least in Toronto, fans have a double-standard.

Red CB Toronto
01-27-2012, 10:12 AM
On that Raptor note, the unfortunate thing is that I know people who work in the NCAA and NBA and one of the issues they have pointed out is that there is no "marketing" infrastructure for the players when they come to Toronto whereas there is in almost every other city in the NBA. It may not be something the regular fan pays attention to, but it is an influencing factor in player decision-making. However, MLSE has either not identified this (meaning their ignorant to their own shortcomings) or do know this but choose not to do something about it. (I don't know which is worse.)

I have a friend in sports marketing and after watching the Bargnani Primo pasta commercial was absolutely dismayed.

Was dismayed at how bad it was from a production stand point or even more his people let him do it. The Primo Pasta ad had such a bush league feel to it, ala a high school av project.

ensco
01-27-2012, 10:13 AM
^I have to say, re BR,s point about competition in Canada, this is really true, and really dismaying if you love Canada.....it's easy to see the evidence of this everywhere...I work in a field where I see management teams from both the US and Canada, in the same industries, and it's generally true that US management teams are a lot stronger. Business is a lot more competitive down there, and it's a lot more meritocratic.

Roogsy
01-27-2012, 10:15 AM
No. Sure, they would WANT to do something to be more competitve, but what makes you think they can? What makes you think this isn't the best they can do?

Look at any other industry - cell phones, the TV/movie business, the auto industry, anything - what you see is a history of Canadian companies looking for ways to be protected from outside competition (even industries that have to be in Canada like resources needed rules to protect Canadian comanies) rather than working to be the best. It's just not our tradition, it's not what we do, it's not in our blood at the management level. And Canadians seem satisfied iall these other industries to spend more and get less than in most other industrialized countries, why should it be any different with sports?


^I have to say, this is really true. I love Canada but it's easy to see the evidence of this....I work in a field where I see management teams from both the US and Canada, in the same industries, and it's generally true that US management teams are a lot stronger. Business is a lot more competitive down there, and it's a lot more meritocratic.

Never thought of that, but you just made me a little more frustrated because what you speak is very true.

Maybe it's because I come from a family of immigrants, but that type of thinking is completely foreign to me. In my opinion, you succeed by having a better product, providing a better service and doing it a cost the client/customer understands is good value relative to what they have received. You win new clients with this model and you reduce any client losses. It is basic business 101 and we seem to avoid it like the plague in Canada. But that's going off topic.

Maybe it is the Canadian mentality to be ok with mediocrity. Maybe that makes me markedly unCanadian. Kind of makes me sad. I love this country, and I love this city but that is severely disappointing. We have everything we need to be the best, and we intentionally choose not to excel. Mindboggling.

Beach_Red
01-27-2012, 10:19 AM
This may be an extreme example, but how long do you think this country would accept our hockey team failing to make it out of a round robin? 1 year? 2 years? 5 years?

We have such high standards for our national hockey team. Being contenders is not only wanted, but expected. I can't reconcile your statement here about "what if they never win championships" with other sports teams, that have the capacity and support to dominate just as much, with the expectations of our national hockey program. It would seem at least in Toronto, fans have a double-standard.

No, other sports teams don't have the same capacity to dominate because there's stronger competition. Maybe it's changing, but I remeber during the famous '72 series it was pointed pointed out that there were more indoor arenas in Saskatchewan than in all of the Soviet Union. So, we went from being so far ahead in hockey that a senior men's team from Whitby could win the world championships to being one of four legitimate contenders.

But I also think Canadian hockey fans can tell the difference between a national team and a corporate-owned team and have different expectations - not a double standard. There's a reason we don't want foreign banks or TV networks to operate freely in Canada. We know we can't compete.

Roogsy
01-27-2012, 10:24 AM
But I also think Canadian hockey fans can tell the difference between a national team and a corporate-owned team and have different expectations - not a double standard. There's a reason we don't want foreign banks or TV networks to operate freely in Canada. We know we can't compete.

Tell what difference? Hockey Canada knows there are expectations (at all levels) and when they fall short, changes are made. Why can't fans of corporate-owned teams do what is in their power to influence change the same way?

We have allowed MLSE to become a monopoly in this city. If anyone thinks that this is good for us and our sports teams, we're fooling ourselves. They have to compete for our attention and dollar even less now.

Beach_Red
01-27-2012, 10:39 AM
Tell what difference? Hockey Canada knows there are expectations (at all levels) and when they fall short, changes are made. Why can't fans of corporate-owned teams do what is in their power to influence change the same way?

We have allowed MLSE to become a monopoly in this city. If anyone thinks that this is good for us and our sports teams, we're fooling ourselves. They have to compete for our attention and dollar even less now.

Because the changes to make in hockey are easy and we can make them. International hockey caused us to up our game a little, properly train coaches and so on, but the infrastructure was there and we could just build on that. Not only has Canada always had far more kids playing hockey, it's been much easier for them to get ice time - every little town in Canada built an arena in the 60's. But that's changing - the rest of the hockey-playing world caught up and we don't build arenas like we did. The playing field has been levelled a little so we see Canada does not win every medal at every level anymore. Sure, there's freaking out but you'll also notice a creeping acceptance of the fact that other countries have caught up.

And that's in a sport that Canada dominated - easily - for a long time. It's very different to become competitive at sports that other countries dominate.

And we simply don't expect our corporations to be able to compete interrnationally or we wouldn't have so many protectionist policies and foreign-ownership rules. We won't be at all surprised when RIM becomes the nxt Nortel.

Oldtimer
01-27-2012, 10:44 AM
I don't thing WE had much choose who the Teachers Pension Fund sold to. As far as basketball and soccer goes, ML$E was the only one willing to put up the dough.

(and as much as we dislike ML$E's corporate feel and incompetence, they are a whole lot more competent than the only individual who was willing to back D2 soccer in Toronto, and that was Bruno Hartrell of the Lynx).

Yohan
01-27-2012, 10:50 AM
http://sports.nationalpost.com/2012/01/26/brian-burke-on-being-ruthless-the-leafs-and-the-cba/

Burke on being a GM

ManUtd4ever
01-27-2012, 10:51 AM
Anyway, I've said all I have to say about this topic. We've been on this merry-go-round many times, and articles writing about the apparently sorry state of Toronto sports are kind of tedious to me.

I watch all of the teams I claim to be a fan of, but if they are crap for several years I won't pay to see them live or buy their overpriced licensed merchandise. For me, that's a fair compromise between my loyalties as a fan, and my imperative to send a message to the owners.

- Scott

This.

Skinn
01-27-2012, 11:02 AM
^I have to say, re BR,s point about competition in Canada, this is really true, and really dismaying if you love Canada.....it's easy to see the evidence of this everywhere...I work in a field where I see management teams from both the US and Canada, in the same industries, and it's generally true that US management teams are a lot stronger. Business is a lot more competitive down there, and it's a lot more meritocratic.

Let's not get carried away with this line of thinking. If you think certain segments of the US population or American industry don't indulge in rhetoric and practices of protectionism, you're kidding yourself. Think softwood lumber or the whole "Buy American" propoganda. This, of course, doesn't say anything about the mindset of protectionism as it may or may not exist in Canada, but to suggest that it isn't a prevalent mindset in the US is just plain wrong.

ensco
01-27-2012, 11:49 AM
Let's not get carried away with this line of thinking. If you think certain segments of the US population or American industry don't indulge in rhetoric and practices of protectionism, you're kidding yourself. Think softwood lumber or the whole "Buy American" propoganda. This, of course, doesn't say anything about the mindset of protectionism as it may or may not exist in Canada, but to suggest that it isn't a prevalent mindset in the US is just plain wrong.

Yes, this would be the standard editorial line of the Globe or Maclean's.

I think the only people who believe this are people who don't know the US very well. If you do, I'd say you are in the minority of those who do.

Technorgasm
01-27-2012, 12:04 PM
I don't get how the fans get to demand a winning team to support. How in Montreal, if the team begins to perform poorly, ticket sales drop.


A sports team represents your community. You are part of that community so you go and cheer for your team. Whether or not they are successful on the field of play is of no consequence.


How many soccer teams would there be at any level globally if everyone adopted the attitude that their team must be the best, or at least have the chance to compete for that title ?


This whole 'blame the fans for going if their team continues to suck' argument is pure garbage. The fans go to support their team, regardless of results. Unlucky for some that ownership prefers to make money from their enterprise than win championships. Sports isn't supposed to be about making money. Sports is supposed to be about competing. It's supposed to be about battling for victory on the field of play.

This was more true through the most part of the last century and much less so now. In the UK we're seeing teams close up shop after 125 years of existence. Times have changed. I think sense of community has changed. People don't give a shit about their non-league local side any more when they can switch on the telly and watch their favourite EPL club play.

I dunno, maybe Toronto fans are more about turning up to see their side play regardless of expectation, whereas Montreallers demand to be the best... maybe that partially explains why the Expos left, and why once they lost the Alouettes, and how they almost lost Les Canadiens.

Maybe we should keep that in mind.


thank god I saved that time typing this.
that mind meld with TOBOR seems to be successfull.


fuck ya.

Fort York Redcoat
01-27-2012, 12:47 PM
"Cheerleading?" How many Toronto sports fans do you know that aren't complaining about their team's poor performance with fellow fans?

Most cases it's just an influx of new fans that can finally attend live when others give up.


This actually proves my point. If you think "complaining" has any sort of impact, then that is part of the problem. Toronto fans can complain all they want but if they buy tickets and buy jerseys and watch the TV broadcasts, then ownership is happy as a pig in shit.

Umm no it still proves my point. Most aren't cheerleading as you call them. They are bringing the same cynical support to a losing game. I'll agree with you on one point, though- Complaining, at the game, or here, doesn't do squat. To actively abstain support by not spending $$ is a start but without numbers banding together to agree on this kind of protest support you'll never see the tables turn toward the consumer.

Roogsy
01-27-2012, 01:15 PM
I have no idea what "cynical support" is. If it is what I think it is, then it's cheerleading. Pure and simple.

But at least on that last point on not having the numbers necessary to effect change, I agree with you. Which only brings me back to repeating myself how about we deserve what we are stuck with. So on that point I will end my part of this discussion.

Roogsy
01-27-2012, 01:17 PM
I don't thing WE had much choose who the Teachers Pension Fund sold to. As far as basketball and soccer goes, ML$E was the only one willing to put up the dough.


Just a correction, MLSE did not bring basketball to Toronto. The Raptors were brought here by the Botive group. MLSE bought them a couple of years into their existance.

MLSE were indeed the ones that brought MLS to Toronto. They can only ride the credit of that move so far.

Red CB Toronto
01-27-2012, 01:24 PM
Just a correction, MLSE did not bring basketball to Toronto. The Raptors were brought here by the Botive group. MLSE bought them a couple of years into their existance.

MLSE were indeed the ones that brought MLS to Toronto. They can only ride the credit of that move so far.

If would have been interesting to see where the Raptors would have ended up if John Bitove had been successful with his shotgun take over attempt and gained full control of the team.

denime
01-27-2012, 01:26 PM
I don't get how the fans get to demand a winning team to support. How in Montreal, if the team begins to perform poorly, ticket sales drop.


A sports team represents your community. You are part of that community so you go and cheer for your team. Whether or not they are successful on the field of play is of no consequence.


How many soccer teams would there be at any level globally if everyone adopted the attitude that their team must be the best, or at least have the chance to compete for that title ?


This whole 'blame the fans for going if their team continues to suck' argument is pure garbage. The fans go to support their team, regardless of results. Unlucky for some that ownership prefers to make money from their enterprise than win championships. Sports isn't supposed to be about making money. Sports is supposed to be about competing. It's supposed to be about battling for victory on the field of play.

This was more true through the most part of the last century and much less so now. In the UK we're seeing teams close up shop after 125 years of existence. Times have changed. I think sense of community has changed. People don't give a shit about their non-league local side any more when they can switch on the telly and watch their favourite EPL club play.

I dunno, maybe Toronto fans are more about turning up to see their side play regardless of expectation, whereas Montreallers demand to be the best... maybe that partially explains why the Expos left, and why once they lost the Alouettes, and how they almost lost Les Canadiens.

Maybe we should keep that in mind.

This post wins . :scarf:

Oldtimer
01-27-2012, 01:27 PM
Just a correction, MLSE did not bring basketball to Toronto. The Raptors were brought here by the Botive group. MLSE bought them a couple of years into their existance.



I thought it was a merger, but when you wrote this I checked and you are right, it was an outright purchase in the end.

Waggy
01-27-2012, 03:37 PM
I typed out an entire response and then the forum lost it. I wont go through the trouble of reposting it other than to say I disagree. To me, this is a "washing your hands" kind of attitude. A defeatist attitude that because we are not the owners, we dont influence how the owners and managers perform. I could not disagree with this position more.

As for the LA or NY excuse, we'd have to wonder why other teams even bother trying. I guess a basketball team in San Antonio can't win multiple NBA championships. Or a football team in remote Green Bay Wisconsin winning the Superbowl more than once, if that. Team ownership and management dont have to bother responding to these types of articles do they? We write their excuses for them.

Forgive me but I dont have an inferiority complex when it comes to Toronto. I love this city. I think its one of the greatest cities in the world and we deserve championship calibre sports teams. I know many players that come to the same conclusion when they come here. But when our own citizens view us as a second rate city, it's not hard to see where the complacency comes from.

Ah shitty. Hate when that happens, well, yet again we can agree to disagree. I see championships coming in one of 2 ways in north american sports. Dominating a draft (like san antonio or oklahoma city in bball) or dominating free agency (like the yankees/lakers/celtics). A good player will take a pay cut to play for their dream team, but will demand a fortune to play for another club. And also can/will try and force trades to that dream team.

To me the main failure of the maple leafs is the fact that most gta born players don't WANT to play for the leafs. The Leafs and Habs won championships when they could mine local talent, outside of the one habs cup in 93 neither club has had any luck since the draft was instituted, but at least french canadians still want to play for the Habs. Put yourself in a players POV: come to toronto where there's a history of failure, where every mistake will be under a microscope and the odds of success are low. You have no privacy, you have a high cost of living, you have to deal with your name constantly getting run through the mud. You get yelled at when you go shopping, your family and friends get chirped if you play bad. It's crap. But it's worth it because you have a chance to get a level of glory/immortality that's impossible to acheive anywhere else in this continent. You have a chance to be a god in a huge city like very few other teams or athletes have a prayer of getting. The Leafs have to sell that chance, and its something they don't seem to understand.

Waggy
01-27-2012, 03:39 PM
If would have been interesting to see where the Raptors would have ended up if John Bitove had been successful with his shotgun take over attempt and gained full control of the team.

Would've been interesting to see where the Raps would've ended up without the Isaiah debacle

Beach_Red
01-27-2012, 04:46 PM
^I have to say, re BR,s point about competition in Canada, this is really true, and really dismaying if you love Canada.....it's easy to see the evidence of this everywhere...I work in a field where I see management teams from both the US and Canada, in the same industries, and it's generally true that US management teams are a lot stronger. Business is a lot more competitive down there, and it's a lot more meritocratic.

Given how the two companies that are really the only players in their industry here have just agreed to co-own the teams, it's hard to imagine that they are run by people who live for thrill of victory that comes from competition.

By the way, has this sale been approved yet?

Whoop
01-27-2012, 05:43 PM
Ah shitty. Hate when that happens, well, yet again we can agree to disagree. I see championships coming in one of 2 ways in north american sports. Dominating a draft (like san antonio or oklahoma city in bball) or dominating free agency (like the yankees/lakers/celtics). A good player will take a pay cut to play for their dream team, but will demand a fortune to play for another club. And also can/will try and force trades to that dream team.

To me the main failure of the maple leafs is the fact that most gta born players don't WANT to play for the leafs. The Leafs and Habs won championships when they could mine local talent, outside of the one habs cup in 93 neither club has had any luck since the draft was instituted, but at least french canadians still want to play for the Habs. Put yourself in a players POV: come to toronto where there's a history of failure, where every mistake will be under a microscope and the odds of success are low. You have no privacy, you have a high cost of living, you have to deal with your name constantly getting run through the mud. You get yelled at when you go shopping, your family and friends get chirped if you play bad. It's crap. But it's worth it because you have a chance to get a level of glory/immortality that's impossible to acheive anywhere else in this continent. You have a chance to be a god in a huge city like very few other teams or athletes have a prayer of getting. The Leafs have to sell that chance, and its something they don't seem to understand.

a) Most French Canadian players also don't want to play in Montreal for the same reason as most GTA players don't want to play in Toronto.

b) And given the current debacle with the coaching situation and the language scenario plus trading a player in the middle of the game, they might have trouble enticing other players to go there in the near future.

ensco
01-27-2012, 05:43 PM
Given how the two companies that are really the only players in their industry here have just agreed to co-own the teams, it's hard to imagine that they are run by people who live for thrill of victory that comes from competition.

By the way, has this sale been approved yet?

Only by their boards of directors. Shareholder approval not needed.

But we haven't heard from the Competition Bureau. That could take months. The deal can't close before their review finishes.

I think this has a decent chance, maybe 50/50, of running into trouble there.

Waggy
01-27-2012, 06:10 PM
a) Most French Canadian players also don't want to play in Montreal for the same reason as most GTA players don't want to play in Toronto.

b) And given the current debacle with the coaching situation and the language scenario plus trading a player in the middle of the game, they might have trouble enticing other players to go there in the near future.


That's what I like to hear! I just kinda assumed. Hopefully after all this PK Subban drama GTA players don't want to go to MTL either.

But I dunno about the coaching thing. I mean, esp we as soccer fans, no-one says anything about Barca and they do a similar thing. I kind of like that the club is viewed as so important to the culture of the province. Besides, imagine what the reaction would be if the Leafs hired a coach who only spoke French. I for one would be FURIOUS.

Waggy
01-27-2012, 06:38 PM
Neither here nor there, but after a quick bit of research, if discovery laws existed in the NHL, this would be the Leafs roster

Forwards
Joe Thornton (London)
Jason Spezza (Toronto)
Rick Nash (Brmapton)
Corey Perry (Peterborough)
Jeff Carter (London)
Brad Boyes (Mississauga)
Steve Stamkos (Markham)
John Tavares (Missisauga)
Logan Couture (London)
Jeff Skinner (Markham)
Tyler Seguin (brampton)

potentially
Eric and Jordan Staal (Thunder Bay)(could be claimed by Winnipeg or Ottawa)
Claude Giroux (Hearst)(could be claimed by Ottawa)

Defense
Drew Doughty (London
PK Subban (Toronto)
Alex Pietrangelo (King City)
Brent Burns (ajax)

potentially
Chris Pronger (Dryden) (could be claimed by the Wings)
Marc Stall (Thunder Bay) (could be Winnipeg or Ottawa)

Goalies
Brian Elliot (Newmarket)

backed up by
Steve Mason (Oakville)
Ray Emery (Hamilton)


I'm not the worlds biggest hockey fan, so may have left some people off the list cause I didn't know they were good (and conversly, do people still think Skinner is any good?). Still. Egads what a team. Clearly southern ontario needs work on producing defensemen though. It's slim pickings there.

Oldtimer
01-27-2012, 06:57 PM
I think this has a decent chance, maybe 50/50, of running into trouble there.

Maybe even higher, under it's current director, the competition bureau has gotten very activist.

Whoop
01-27-2012, 06:57 PM
That's what I like to hear! I just kinda assumed. Hopefully after all this PK Subban drama GTA players don't want to go to MTL either.

But I dunno about the coaching thing. I mean, esp we as soccer fans, no-one says anything about Barca and they do a similar thing. I kind of like that the club is viewed as so important to the culture of the province. Besides, imagine what the reaction would be if the Leafs hired a coach who only spoke French. I for one would be FURIOUS.

Barca has hired a number of foreign coaches before. I mean Frank Rijkaard was the previous coach before Pep took over and Johan Cruyff was the first one to win them an European Cup.

Whoop
01-27-2012, 07:00 PM
Neither here nor there, but after a quick bit of research, if discovery laws existed in the NHL, this would be the Leafs roster

Forwards
Joe Thornton (London)
Jason Spezza (Toronto)
Rick Nash (Brmapton)
Corey Perry (Peterborough)
Jeff Carter (London)
Brad Boyes (Mississauga)
Steve Stamkos (Markham)
John Tavares (Missisauga)
Logan Couture (London)
Jeff Skinner (Markham)
Tyler Seguin (brampton)

potentially
Eric and Jordan Staal (Thunder Bay)(could be claimed by Winnipeg or Ottawa)
Claude Giroux (Hearst)(could be claimed by Ottawa)

Defense
Drew Doughty (London
PK Subban (Toronto)
Alex Pietrangelo (King City)
Brent Burns (ajax)

potentially
Chris Pronger (Dryden) (could be claimed by the Wings)
Marc Stall (Thunder Bay) (could be Winnipeg or Ottawa)

Goalies
Brian Elliot (Newmarket)

backed up by
Steve Mason (Oakville)
Ray Emery (Hamilton)


I'm not the worlds biggest hockey fan, so may have left some people off the list cause I didn't know they were good (and conversly, do people still think Skinner is any good?). Still. Egads what a team. Clearly southern ontario needs work on producing defensemen though. It's slim pickings there.

There are a number of GTA/southern Ontario defensemen that you missed.

Waggy
01-27-2012, 07:21 PM
There are a number of GTA/southern Ontario defensemen that you missed.


Not a shocker, like I said not a huge hockey fan. I watch the Leafs and the playoffs, that's about it. But point being is we can clearly see why the leafs USED to win, the trick is making those guys want to come play here. Somehow. Anyhow. I mean jesus, look at that roster even without the D-men I missed. Even the goaltending is good. Fans protesting or doing anything really isn't going to be what convinces them to come, it's got to be the club. If anything, Leafs fans could make a difference by consciously deciding on 2 newspapers, 1 tv station and 1 radio station to follow so the others fold and reduce the media pressure on players a bit. But that's just ridiculous.


edit: and doesn't Barca make it's players learn Catalan? Isn't making 20 guys learn a language a bit steeper than making 1 guy learn? It's not like the Habs expect every player to learn french (though I'm sure almost all learn some)

ensco
01-27-2012, 08:40 PM
Maybe even higher, under it's current director, the competition bureau has gotten very activist.

You're right, she has been relatively activist.

I think it's a slam dunk that it should be stopped. They are taking an existing monopoly and making it ridiculously stronger. It could be a monopsony (monopoly of supply) case, but I'm not that expert in this stuff.

The politics of this are tricky. Taking on the state religion is never easy. Bell and Rogers together wield immense political power. They know how to game the system, and make that last minute concession that looks meaningful but really isn't. So it's not straightforward.

Shakes McQueen
01-27-2012, 09:08 PM
I don't think it'll be a problem. Joint ventures between corporations are fairly normal - the fact that it also gives them joint exclusivity to the broadcast rights won't change anything.

Plus, it's not like the government has expressed a problem with competition as Bell and Rogers became the giant telecom monopolies they are today.

- Scott

billyfly
01-27-2012, 09:48 PM
I don't get how the fans get to demand a winning team to support. How in Montreal, if the team begins to perform poorly, ticket sales drop.


A sports team represents your community. You are part of that community so you go and cheer for your team. Whether or not they are successful on the field of play is of no consequence.


How many soccer teams would there be at any level globally if everyone adopted the attitude that their team must be the best, or at least have the chance to compete for that title ?


This whole 'blame the fans for going if their team continues to suck' argument is pure garbage. The fans go to support their team, regardless of results. Unlucky for some that ownership prefers to make money from their enterprise than win championships. Sports isn't supposed to be about making money. Sports is supposed to be about competing. It's supposed to be about battling for victory on the field of play.

This was more true through the most part of the last century and much less so now. In the UK we're seeing teams close up shop after 125 years of existence. Times have changed. I think sense of community has changed. People don't give a shit about their non-league local side any more when they can switch on the telly and watch their favourite EPL club play.

I dunno, maybe Toronto fans are more about turning up to see their side play regardless of expectation, whereas Montreallers demand to be the best... maybe that partially explains why the Expos left, and why once they lost the Alouettes, and how they almost lost Les Canadiens.

Maybe we should keep that in mind.

Tell that to several people on this board and those that we all have to rub shoulders with while they are dressed in their Red Sox or Hab or whatever gear at BMO.

This is my City. Don't diss my Leafs, Jays, Raps and expect me to break bread with you over TFC.

glaze
01-27-2012, 10:10 PM
The issue people have skipped is that for many people it is an inconvenience to go to a game. The ratings for alot of the sports are great. But for the Jays, getting downtown on a weeknight game has its challenges, same for the raptors. The Leafs don't count, because thier tix are so hard to come by, its a special occassion for many to have the chance to go.
Fact is, most fans would rather stay home and watch tv. And thats why none of the teams are in trouble of leaving, because their owners need programming. If Toronto ever gets a second NHL team, the raptors may be threatened. But otherwise attendance is not a proper indication of where any of the franchises exist.
That said, if owners arent worried about attendance, then what is the incentive to field a competitive product?

123 elite
01-27-2012, 10:19 PM
Jeez roogsy

I tend to agree with you on a lot of what you post but you make following any kind of sport an ordeal. You sound like you go off after a game and scan the spreadsheets of all the worlds top corporations when the rest of us are at the pub having a post match moan or smile. Lighten up a bit. Maybe its being a Brit or something but there is a bit more to watching sport than demanding success. Half the fun is the failure and utter stupidity of it all.

Beach_Red
01-27-2012, 11:21 PM
I don't think it'll be a problem. Joint ventures between corporations are fairly normal - the fact that it also gives them joint exclusivity to the broadcast rights won't change anything.

Plus, it's not like the government has expressed a problem with competition as Bell and Rogers became the giant telecom monopolies they are today.

- Scott

Well, yeah, the government has expressed all kinds of problems with both these companies in the past but like Ensco says, these are companies with immense political power that have gamed the system. The term "regulatory capture" wasn't first coined about the CRTC but it may as well have been.

There'll be some token gesture and the deal will be approved. It's actually quite shocking how Bell got everything it wanted when it bought CTV, a network that now doesn't show anything but simulcast American shows in prime time (the odd pilot for a Canadian show but the show then moves to Much or Bravo or Comedy). Even Fecan didn't get away with that.

JuliquE
01-27-2012, 11:45 PM
Jeez roogsy

I tend to agree with you on a lot of what you post but you make following any kind of sport an ordeal. You sound like you go off after a game and scan the spreadsheets of all the worlds top corporations when the rest of us are at the pub having a post match moan or smile. Lighten up a bit. Maybe its being a Brit or something but there is a bit more to watching sport than demanding success. Half the fun is the failure and utter stupidity of it all.
This post just won the forum.

Would like to thank everybody for coming öut.

ensco
01-27-2012, 11:51 PM
Half the fun is the failure and utter stupidity of it all.

I salute you. What a great line!

Roogsy
01-28-2012, 02:15 AM
For the record I am not against fun guys. Those here that know me also know the frustrations expressed here on these boards remain here and I am easy-going away from here.

But it does confuse me that the expressions on this board reveal a focus on a good time (which is fine) and little interest on the activist side of what a supporters group is supposed to do. It demonstrates all the characteristics of cheerleading and yet people take offence at being labelled according to their behaviour. If it's what you want to do, embrace it! Nobody should force anyone to act or do anything other than they want.

Shakes McQueen
01-28-2012, 02:42 AM
For the record I am not against fun guys. Those here that know me also know the frustrations expressed here on these boards remain here and I am easy-going away from here.

But it does confuse me that the expressions on this board reveal a focus on a good time (which is fine) and little interest on the activist side of what a supporters group is supposed to do. It demonstrates all the characteristics of cheerleading and yet people take offence at being labelled according to their behaviour. If it's what you want to do, embrace it! Nobody should force anyone to act or do anything other than they want.

Roogs, it's pretty clear you use the term "cheerleading" as a reductive pejorative, because what they are describing does not fit the characteristics of "cheerleading" by any definition other than a negative, condescending one. Of course they take offense.

What they are, is fans. They simply have a different philosophy than you about what that role means to them. Everyone is a bit different.

- Scott

ManUtd4ever
01-28-2012, 09:11 AM
Maybe its being a Brit or something but there is a bit more to watching sport than demanding success. Half the fun is the failure and utter stupidity of it all.

Agreed. Besides, the taste of victory is even sweeter after the bitterness of defeat.